Standardized observations showed that male engineering students who had previously expressed subtle sexist attitudes on a pretest were more likely, when talking with a female engineering student about work issues, to adopt a domineering posture and to display signs of sexual interest (such as noticeably looking at the woman’s body).

In the next 2 experiments, female engineering students were randomly assigned in one experiment to interact with males who had endorsed different levels of subtle sexism, and in a second experiment with an actor who randomly either displayed or did not display the domineering/sexual nonverbal behaviors. Women performed worse on an engineering test after interacting with the randomly-assigned sexist males (or males simulating sexists’ nonverbal behavior).

In another experiment, women’s poorer performance was shown to be limited to stereotype-related tests, not a broad cognitive deficit. In a final experiment, interacting with a domineering/sexually interested male caused women to have temporarily elevated concern about negative stereotypes, which they subsequent attempted to suppress (thought suppression being a well-known resource hog).

The results further support the idea that even subtle sexism can be toxic in workplace environments where women are traditionally targets of discrimination.

But there’s one thing missing from her story… Who is the household-name scientist who propositioned her? Kirshenbaum doesn’t say, but inquiring (and gossipy) minds want to know. She does write: “I remind[ed] him I have a popular science blog and warn never to call back.”

Am I a terrible, awful person because a small part of me wants him to call back?